Safe Speed Forums

Dear all,

While we know that undertaking is contrary to the highway code and potentially dangerous, we also know that the reasons people indulge in undertaking are that many driviers hog lane 2 and even lane 3. My conjecture is; our only recourse, having chanced upon such a hogger and tried everything reasonable to get them to move over to let us pass, is to go around them on the left.
If there was any real live policing or useful driver education, these ignorant people would not be allowed a mortgage on the middle lane or right lane in the first place - they cause the problem, we are forced to solve it. So, if there are traffic cops out there, let them pull us ALL over and tell us what we're doing wrong, otherwise, go ahead and use your best judgement and undertake if you have to.
In attacking undertaking I think we're into a case of 'blame the victim', which seems to be the mode in which this country is permanently stuck.

Over to you...

As a driver I prefer to regard other road users as 'passive' hazards. They get in my way in much the same sense that a bend does. It's never personal.

If I choose to undertake a lane hogger (rare) it'll be very carefully considered and planned and I wouldn't expect to attract the attentions of the Police. As such I don't believe I'll be 'blamed' at all.

It'd be great if we had sufficient roads policing and it'd be great if we had proper road safety policies. As it is we don't. No one is telling the lane hogs that they are wrong. For that I blame policy. And if the message isn't clear enough and isn't out there enough, then I'm not sure we should blame the lane hogging individuals at all either.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

I used to be very against undertaking but now I do it myself. Reasons:-

1) middle and outer lane hogging when L1 is clear

2) Bus lanes with times on them. People too stupid or lazy to read the times so go into L2 anyway then potter along at 25mph

There should be no need to undertake in this country but people drive like zombies in a dream world. They have no perception of the traffic around them.

When I drive in the US undertaking is legal. Cars pick the lane that is going at the speed they want to go at then stick to it. No lane hogging and no continuous lane changing. This must be safer overall.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

Dear Gizmo, thank you for bringing that issue up. I lived and drove in the US for many years and although the driving standard was generally pretty dodgy it definitely was no worse than we see here now. I've never seen any problem in the US because of undertaking, never an accident as a result.
However, repeal a UK road law to allow for lack of policing & education? Fat chance.
Please note undertaking is generally not legal in the US when there isn't a hard shoulder (for the inside vehicle to pull on to if needed) also note that every State has its individual laws.

Many motorway crashes are caused by negligent lane changes. While we have a 'no undertaking' rule, it's normally possible for someone to negligently lane change to the left without causing a crash. If we allowed undertaking, I think there's a chance that crashes from negligent lane changes would double. The counter argument is that there would be less need to change lane.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Dear Paul (SafeSpeed),
I think you're right, on balance we've got road rage and lane hogging versus the need to make reasonable progress when faced with selfish driving. Maybe rewriting the law to allow random lane use would, on balance, help. Maybe there's a better way, I don't have the answer.
We're talking about a shift of driving culture and environment. Changing anything brings both new risks and opportunities.
We're currently struggling with the dilema of laws written in older times when we had road police to enforce them plus some inherent courtesy. We drive in a modern culture based on remote-camera policing and selfish, insular attitudes.
I think it's time for acceptance of the change; for the law to be brought up to date and adapted to fit the new culture it's helped create.

Perhaps a slight refocusing of the emphasis of safe driving should include stronger(or more commonly enforced) penalties for those who willfully impede other's progess maybe a good idea. I'm trying to word it in the bet way possible, because I certainly would not want to see a case where slower drivers have to 'dive for cover' to get out of the way of faster moving traffic. That would, in my eyes, mean an educational push to try and get all drivers to co-operate better by allowing overtaking wherever possible. Few drivers could complain about being stuck behind someone on the motorway for a short period if they were confident the driver in front would pull in and let them past at the first safe opportunity. Therefore there would be less tailgaiting and less frustration. Too much emphasis is placed on aggressive drivers getting road rage. You have to question though, whether some drivers would get road rage at all if they wern't being needlessly held up.

Same goes for country roads, there is a certain band of drivers that are claiming the moral high ground by doing a constant 40mph even if conditions would allow for higher speeds. Therefore at the moment should someone make a deperate lunge to get past after being stuck for 20 miles on a cross-country slog it will all be the his or her fault. That is of course true, they should have waited for a better overtaking opportunity, but does the driver in front not hold some responsibility for not pulling over and letting the (probably very long) queue past?

sounds like the german autobahn

(hmmm i'll just pass this car in L2, check mirrors.... nothing.. commence overtake.... check mirrors... where the F*** did that beemer come from ? )

Answering Gizmo's point about drivers in the US, I have been to New York/Connecticut with business and am usually picked up by a cab. The driver (and others around) generally change lanes every few hundred yards dependant on which lane is moving fastest! Overtaking and undertaking is the norm and no-one gets outraged or starts shooting up the offending car (so far )

I believe we should be allowed to undertake (where it is safe to do so) to enable normal, sensible drivers the opportunity to make safe, steady progress. Drivers who hog L2/L3 are obviously unaware of their surroundings otherwise they would be using the inside lane.

What is the point in crossing all three lanes of the motorway to overtake a L2 hogger and pull back across all three to get into L1. You have probably travelled 3 times the distance to get 50yds or so in front of the offender.

Undertakers are the victims not the perpetrators of poor driving. I do it and will continue to do so as long as it is safe and I have considered the alternative more of a risk.

The problem with the Yank system is that (presumably - I haven't driven there) you end up with lanes with a fairly similar speed, whereas the British system, IF LANE DISCIPLINE WAS OBSERVED should ensure that vehicles can move at a range of speeds.

On the American versions of our A roads (prefixed by US like US19) then traffic can turn off both left and right at each intersection, this means that all lanes (two, three four etc) can all be travelling at different speeds regardless of their “place” on the road. Usually if you want to go straight on then the middle lane is the one to use as people will be slowing for their exits in the outer lanes.

The larger interstates are run more like our motorways and slower traffic must keep to the right and return to the right after overtaking. Here undertaking does take place but I’ve seen far less of it than I have here, but generally there is little reason to.

Worth mentioning that the average interstate speeds are similar to our motorways, but highway patrols are out in numbers, although I have only seen them pull those going what I would consider as too fast. (i.e I was doing 80 in a 70 and they didn’t bat an eyelid, but I did see them pull someone doing around a ton in heavy-ish traffic)

Cheers

Paul

Generaly slower traffic sticks to L1 and L2. This is because it is easier to get to the exits which are on the right (usualy). They have lower speed limits for HGVs same as here and they often specify the have to stick to righ hand lane.

Because there is a more even spread of traffic accross the roads (many of which are only 2 lanes anyway) there is hardly any tailgating.

Other good features of US roads...

#Hard sholder on both sides of road in many cases
#W I D E median (central reservation) giving a substantial run-off area if sh*t happens.
#They have MINIMUM speed limits on intertate highways

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

The best thing of all is that the US has a much larger land so can afford generous use of space.

When I was last in Illinois joining an Interstate, the trucks went 75 - 80 mph in L1, which was scary the first time I met it because I was trying to join the Interstate, and misjudged his speed badly and had to slow down (sharpish!) to let him past. As a UK driver I was expected trucks going at 56mph or so, and had judged that I would get up to 70mph or so and easily join in front of him. When I got to 65 - 70 he had closed the gap to nothing and was still faster than me, and the on-ramp was running out fast.

In a conversation later with some truckers in a bar they said that this was normal and also pointed out that the trucks can be much longer than here, and much heavier too.

I was not aware of this, and if there is a lower limit it was completely ignored by pretty much every HGV I saw, many passing me in excess of 85 mph in the outside lane - this was in Florida and Georgia, I know some states have different laws.

Funnily enough now you mention it, the only accidents I saw involved HGV's

Cheers

Paul

Wilfully or carelessly, yes.

I very much agree with the 'impediment' approach, because a strengthened 'keep left' approach would outlaw some excellent safe practice. For example:

* In very quiet or deserted motorway conditions I'll use L2 because I'm further from potential danger with more options if things do go wrong. If anyone turns up behind I'll move left early.

* On left hand bends I want to position right for longer vision. If I can do so without getting in anyone's way I will.

* After overtaking I want to stay out, without pressure to return early unless there's someone behind who needs the space I'm using.

* Sometimes it's possible to improve your vision considerably by staying one or more lanes to the right because of the positioning of other vehicles. If there's no one within a reasonable distance behind, then why not take the improved vision?

* Sometimes driving with a lateral stagger (i.e. in a different lane to other vehicles) gives much greater safety space in front. Again, If there's no one within a reasonable distance behind, then why not take the safety space?

So the whole thing is NOT about keeping left. It's about giving and taking space.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Perhaps white lines should be removed so the motorway becomes one huge lane. I believe this has been successfully implemented in Denmark (?). The concept is to discourage lane hogging (as there won't be any lanes) and to encourage people to be aware of what they and other drivers are doing.
Perhaps trials would be a place to start.

Also, see this:
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1635406,00.htmls

Juliette Jowit, transport editor
Sunday November 6, 2005
The Observer


First came the dreaded speed hump and other obstacles to make drivers slow down. Now local authorities are to be allowed to use more subtle and psychological tricks to get motorists to take their foot off the accelerator.
A major report for the Department for Transport reveals that 'psychological' traffic calming works. Painting the road different colours, taking out white lines or planting things in the way of sight-lines on corners can be used to make roads look narrower, or bumpy or windy. Drivers then feel less safe and drive more slowly - a principle adopted most radically in one town in the Netherlands which abolished all signs and road markings.

The four-year study by the Transport Research Laboratory found that many optical tricks were successful in slowing speeds: in simulator tests all speeds fell when the measures were introduced, some by an average of more than 4mph; and in one test in Latton, Norfolk, average speeds fell by up to 8 mph, and the speeds of faster drivers by even more.

The most successful measures, likely to be used in future, were using red bricks to make the road look narrower and small areas 'built out' into the road with trees, shrubs or wooden posts, said the report.

The findings were welcomed by road and safety groups as the future of traffic calming. This 'has been refined over the years, it's a lot more sophisticated now with speed cushions, chicanes and mini-islands. This is the next advance,' said Roger Vincent, spokesman for the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents.

Interest in psychological traffic-calming measures has been growing for a few years: in Britain, London's Kensington and Chelsea council is discussing taking all 'road furniture' off Exhibition Road. Central white lines have been successfully removed in some Norfolk villages, and lines before roundabouts are painted more closely together so drivers feel they are driving faster.

Importantly for politicians and safety campaigners, focus groups and questionnaires also found that psychological measures were much more popular than physical obstacles like humps and cushions.

Janet Kennedy, the main author of the report, thinks this is because the tricks draw on elements of real roads, such as country lanes, where many motorists naturally drive more slowly.

'Residents usually welcome speed-reducing measures such as road humps, but drivers forced to reduce speeds by artificial means tend to resent it,' she said. 'Drivers tend not to resent having to slow down on a winding country lane or at a hump-back bridge.'

The report says it is vital that the psychological measures do not actually increase risk, for example from vehicles hitting trees, and they work best when used with physical traffic calming. It also admits the need for more tests to see if they are still effective after several years, rather than just months.

However, a Department for Transport spokesman said it was so confident in the results that next year it would issue advice to local authorities on when, where and how the measures work best.

'This research is positive but we realise these things won't necessarily work everywhere, and local authorities will still be the ones to determine the best option for them,' said the spokesman.

A Freight Transport Association official said another advantage would be to break up monotonous roads which can make drivers drowsy.

Kevin Delaney, the RAC Foundation's head of safety, said removing central white lines from roads through villages had been very successful in reducing speeds and accidents, and many more rural and urban roads could benefit from similar changes.

'It has to be done thoughtfully but sometimes if you remove some of the certainty it does make the roads a little bit safer because it does put the onus back on the driver,' he said.

So does it work?

Driving sensibly has never been my forte and I was quietly sceptical when, as the Observer guinea pig, I was asked to test the new, psychological, traffic calming measures at the Transport Research Laboratory simulator in Bracknell, Berkshire. The test involved 'driving' through rolling countryside interrupted by villages with differing measures. Here are the results:

Village 1

No calming measures

The first village bought out my usual village driving technique: stare at the speedometer, sit religiously at the 30mph line and refuse to go a fragment under. This is not a DVLA recommended technique.

My speed: 30 mph

Village 2

Redbrick 'narrowing'

Much to my surprise, this measure instantly slowed me down. Not knowing where to find the edge of the road made me drive towards the centre. The fear of other vehicles coming in the opposite direction immediately reduced my speed.

My speed: 27-28 mph

Village 3

Tree 'buildouts'

These forced me towards the centre, and fear of hitting a tree brought my speed down further. It took my eyes off the speedo by worrying more about what was in the road - which can only be a good thing.

My speed: 25 mph

· Dan Selinger

Thank you for your response Dan, may I respectfully refer you to the Original Post - the one about undertaking on motorways.
Having said that, I intend to start a new post on traffic calming and I'm working on the wording of that now.

I imagine these work more because they are new than for any other reason.

I have been driving long enough to remember the first traffic calming in this area. A few pedestrian buildouts and chicanes. They worked! for about 3 weeks, then everyone got used to them.